THE LANDMARK CASE OF H3H3 PRODUCTIONS VS. BOLD GUY IN RE: RAFFY TULFO IN ACTION
01:05.4
Itong si na, ano, Ethan at Hila Klein, or Hila Klein, mga kabatas natin, sila ay gumagawa ng mga reaction videos.
01:15.7
Ano yung ginagawa nila doon sa reaction videos nila? Nagpe-play din sila ng video, tapos nagre-react sila dito.
01:22.7
Exactly the way I'm doing it. Okay?
01:26.9
Many YouTubers, exactly the way many YouTubers are doing it.
01:31.2
So pag titignan niyo, mga kabatas natin, simple search ng H3H3 Productions, copyright infringement case, lalabas diyan.
01:38.2
Judge sides with YouTubers Ethan and Hila or Hila Klein, Math Hozenzade, pala Ethan Klein and Hila Klein, sabi niya.
01:49.2
Ito yung official na pag-aaralan natin, mga kabatas natin, na summary mula sa copyright office ng United States.
01:56.9
Maraming nagtatanong sa akin, attorney America naman yan, hindi unapplicable dito sa Pilipinas.
02:02.0
Mga kabatas natin, I have told you already na yung mga decisions sa Amerika ay parte ng ating, hindi naman parte, but they are secondary sources of Philippine law.
02:13.1
Pag makikita niyo, mga kabatas natin, marami akong pinapakita sa inyo ng mga jurisprudence kung saan yung Supreme Court natin, no less than the Supreme Court of the Philippines,
02:22.4
actually used cases from the United States as sources.
02:26.9
Of Philippine law.
02:28.6
Ano ang pinakamagandang example dito?
02:30.5
Yung Miranda Rights, mga kabatas natin.
02:32.6
Yung Miranda Rights na yan, hiniram natin sa Amerika yan.
02:36.6
Galing actually sa Amerika yan.
02:38.8
Ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
02:41.8
YouTube stars win fair use battle.
02:44.6
Reaction video deemed fair use in YouTube court battle.
02:48.5
YouTube stars H3H3 win landmark court case against blah blah blah blah.
02:54.0
YouTubers Ethan and Hila Klein win,
03:12.8
This was decided, mga kabatas natin, August 23, 2017 pa.
03:21.3
So ito, mga kabatas natin,
03:23.6
Merry Christmas sa inyong lahat,
03:25.9
and syempre, ito ang ating titignan.
03:31.7
Babasahin ko na lang, mga kabatas natin.
03:33.9
These are the key facts.
03:40.5
Hindi ko na babasahin yung last name niya
03:42.0
kasi medyo hindi ko alam naman kung paano i-pronounce yan eh.
03:45.2
Jose Inza, di ba?
03:47.0
Matt na lang yung plaintiff, no?
03:48.8
Plaintiff Matt, ito yung nag-file ng kaso
03:50.8
pag plaintiff ang sabi, no?
03:52.6
In relation to, ano, to this case kasi,
03:55.8
this is a civil case.
03:58.3
Yung final ng Rafi Tulfo in action na copyright infringement case sa akin
04:02.9
ay, ano, mga kabatas natin,
04:07.0
it is a criminal suit.
04:10.7
But we will not be talking about
04:12.4
the copyright infringement case ni Rafi Tulfo.
04:15.3
We'll be talking about this one.
04:17.6
Hindi yung Rafi Tulfo in action.
04:19.0
Let's talk about this one.
04:20.5
Sabi niyang ganyan, no?
04:21.7
Plaintiff Matt is a filmmaker
04:23.8
who created a video posted,
04:26.7
a short five-minute skit
04:28.2
about his character,
04:30.5
pursuing a woman.
04:32.5
So, ito, mga kabatas natin,
04:33.6
may video din na linabas sa YouTube.
04:36.3
Defendants Ethan Klein
04:39.5
o the Klein's na lang, no?
04:40.9
Defendants na lang ang tawag sa atin.
04:43.4
Created a 14-minute reaction video
04:46.8
commenting on plaintiff's video
04:49.2
and also posted it to YouTube.
04:52.5
So, yung din ang ginawa nila,
04:53.9
may video yung isa,
04:55.2
tapos sila, gumawa sila
04:56.9
ng reaction video nila dito
04:58.6
at pinost sa video.
05:01.3
Ngayon, in so doing,
05:03.5
nung ginawa nila yun,
05:04.5
mga kabatas natin,
05:05.4
defendants showed portions.
05:08.6
Ito, mga kabatas natin, no?
05:09.7
About three minutes.
05:12.1
Tatlong minuto ang pinakita,
05:13.9
mga kabatas natin,
05:15.0
doon sa video nung nagkaso.
05:18.8
Of plaintiff's video.
05:20.8
Plaintiff sent YouTube
05:22.8
a takedown notification
05:24.0
and YouTube removed the video.
05:25.2
Defendants then sent
05:27.5
a counter notification
05:28.6
challenging the takedown
05:30.0
on the basis of their video
05:31.4
was inter alia fair use
05:33.6
and non-commercial.
05:35.5
Plaintiff filed an action
05:36.9
alleging copyright infringement
05:38.7
and seeking 512 damages
05:42.5
due to defendants having
05:43.6
made alleged misrepresentation
05:45.3
in their counter notification.
05:48.2
Defendants then posted
05:49.5
another video discussing the lawsuit.
05:52.0
After which, plaintiff amended
05:54.2
his complaint to include
05:55.2
a defamation claim.
05:57.4
Both parties filed motion
05:58.8
for summary judgment.
06:01.7
So, nagkasuhan na sila.
06:04.2
Ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
06:07.0
whether defendants' reaction video
06:09.2
showing a large portion.
06:11.0
So, malaki pa daw yung portion.
06:12.3
Kasi, mga kabatas natin,
06:13.2
dito, eight minutes lang yung video.
06:14.9
Na ginawa nung tao
06:19.3
Eight minutes lang.
06:20.3
Tapos, three minutes.
06:21.5
No, mga kabatas natin.
06:23.9
sorry, five minutes lang.
06:25.2
Ang pala, mga kabatas natin,
06:26.6
five minutes lang yung video.
06:28.5
Tapos, ang ginamit doon sa video,
06:33.1
So, mas malaki, mga kabatas natin,
06:35.7
yung ginamit, no,
06:38.6
na re-reactionan,
06:42.4
No, malaki, malaki.
06:43.7
Very substantial part.
06:46.8
Very substantial part.
06:48.1
Ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
06:49.4
ito yung ruling ng judge.
06:51.9
Ito yung sabi ng judge.
06:52.8
After conducting a four-step analysis,
06:55.2
the court found that
06:56.5
defendant's use was fair
06:58.0
as a matter of law
06:59.5
and granted their motion.
07:01.4
The court concluded
07:02.3
the first factor,
07:03.6
purpose and character
07:04.9
of infringing work
07:07.6
in defendant's favor
07:09.1
because their video is
07:10.7
quintessential criticism
07:13.9
The second factor,
07:15.1
nature of the copyrighted work
07:17.2
favored plaintiff
07:18.8
because the work was
07:19.9
entirely scripted
07:23.0
So, dito, sinabi niya,
07:23.9
mga kabatas natin,
07:24.7
hindi naman lahat,
07:26.5
mga kabatas natin,
07:27.9
doon sa mga kriteriya,
07:31.8
hindi lahat doon sa mga kriteriya
07:33.5
na tinitignan natin
07:37.3
Na ipanalo nung plaintiff
07:39.4
o kaya ng defendant.
07:41.5
May naipanalo yung plaintiff,
07:43.0
may naipanalo yung defendant.
07:45.8
mga kabatas natin,
07:48.0
naipanalo nila ito.
07:50.3
Yung first factor,
07:51.8
purpose and character
07:52.7
of infringing work,
07:54.1
mga kabatas natin,
07:54.7
pumasok sa mga defendants.
07:56.8
Yung video kasi nila,
07:58.3
criticism and comment.
07:59.9
Yung second factor naman,
08:01.3
nature of the copyrighted work,
08:04.2
o yung nagkaso naman,
08:05.9
mga kabatas natin,
08:08.2
The second factor,
08:09.2
nature of the copyrighted work
08:10.4
favored plaintiff
08:12.2
was entirely scripted
08:15.6
Yung third factor naman,
08:16.9
mga kabatas natin,
08:17.8
amount and substantiality
08:19.8
of the portion used,
08:23.8
because to comment,
08:24.7
and on a critique a work,
08:31.0
and critique a work,
08:33.1
yung pala yung sinabi niya,
08:34.4
clips of the original may be used.
08:36.6
So, mga kabatas natin,
08:38.3
dito, sinabi ng korte,
08:40.6
Sinabi ng korte dito,
08:43.9
ay magko-comment naman
08:47.2
kung gaano karami
08:49.8
Sabi niya ganyan.
08:51.8
kailangan mo naman talagang
08:55.2
It is necessary to use part
08:57.0
or substantial part
09:02.2
It's plainly necessary
09:05.7
the transformative purpose
09:08.1
critical commentary.
09:11.7
Ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
09:12.9
but at the same time,
09:14.1
a great deal of plaintiff's work
09:17.2
The final factor,
09:18.6
effect on the use
09:19.6
upon the potential market
09:21.7
weighted in favor of defendant
09:23.7
because their video
09:25.4
as a market substitute.
09:28.3
So, ibig sabihin naman doon,
09:30.0
pagpagtitignan nyo dito,
09:31.1
kasi mga kabatas natin,
09:34.4
doon sa first factor,
09:36.6
nakuha yun ng defendants.
09:38.2
Doon sa second factor,
09:39.4
mga kabatas natin,
09:46.7
Doon sa third factor,
09:49.8
kailangan naman talagang
09:51.7
Pero mga kabatas natin,
09:56.0
sinabing ganyan dito,
09:57.2
panalo yung defendants
09:58.4
because their video
10:00.0
as a market substitute.
10:02.9
Kasi mga kabatas natin,
10:04.3
it's a commentary.
10:07.1
and the criticism.
10:08.4
They don't go there
10:09.2
for just watching
10:20.3
Yun ang sinabi doon,
10:21.2
mga kabatas natin.
10:24.1
sabi niyang ganyan,
10:27.3
plaintiff's video,
10:28.7
since it responds
10:31.2
plaintiff's video
10:43.3
for summary judgment.
10:45.3
The court also dismissed
10:46.4
plaintiff's claims
10:48.5
under section 512F
10:50.7
because it had found
10:54.7
defendants' argument
10:56.4
and not a misrepresentation
11:00.4
to have a subjective
11:01.7
good faith belief
11:05.7
to avoid such damages.
11:08.0
So, pag titignan nyo dito
11:08.9
kasi mga kabatas natin,
11:10.1
ang pinaka-importante
11:12.0
yung final factor.
11:13.5
What is the final factor?
11:14.8
It's the transformation
11:17.0
it's the transformative
11:22.9
copyrighted work.
11:28.6
So, pag titignan nyo dito
11:29.7
mga kabatas natin,
11:31.7
Yung mga tao kasi
11:33.4
well, alam nyo naman
11:36.7
especially if they are
11:38.7
parang sinasabi nila
11:42.3
mga kabatas natin
11:44.1
copyright infringement
11:48.4
It's not necessary.
11:49.8
What is necessary
11:51.5
yung factors na yun
11:53.5
mga kabatas natin
11:54.0
yung factors na yun
11:55.2
ang necessary lang doon
11:59.8
kasi factors lang yun
12:01.4
na iko-consider eh.
12:03.2
Hindi parang ano yun
12:04.3
hindi dapat pumasok
12:07.8
as copyright infringement.
12:12.0
of copyright infringement.
12:14.9
Just like for example
12:18.6
video for commentary
12:20.6
bakit neutral yun
12:22.8
because how can you
12:24.0
comment on a video
12:25.5
if you don't show the video
12:33.8
magkakomment tayo sa video
12:35.2
tapos you will not show the video
12:36.9
so how will people
12:40.4
ang sinasabi ng maraming tao eh.
12:43.5
hindi gumamit ng video
12:44.9
o video ng ibang tao.
12:47.4
Pag titignan nyo dito
12:48.4
mga kabatas natin
12:49.4
and I'll show you once again
12:51.8
mga kabatas natin
12:54.0
sige tignan nyo dito
12:59.2
ito yung sinabi nya
13:06.8
amount and substantiality
13:08.7
of the portion used
13:10.5
because to comment
13:11.5
and critique a work
13:12.8
clips of the original
13:15.1
and their use of clips
13:17.1
was plainly necessary
13:21.7
the transformative
13:23.4
of the commentary.
13:31.4
tapos at the same time
13:33.4
ang laki din ng portion na kinopia
13:35.4
kasi nga more than half
13:38.4
eh five minutes lang yung video.
13:42.4
So pag titignan nyo
13:43.4
mga kabatas natin
13:45.4
walang hindi pa pa-pass
13:47.4
yung mga argument ng mga tao na
13:49.4
hindi mo naman kailangan i-play yan.
13:51.4
It's it's it's the point.
13:55.4
I mean the point is
13:56.4
that the court who said here
13:57.4
actually that it's
13:58.4
plainly necessary
14:01.4
the transform at transformative
14:02.4
purpose of critical commentary.
14:04.4
Ayun mga kabatas natin.
14:05.4
I just want you to
14:06.4
I just want to share you
14:08.4
this was decided in
14:12.4
alam niyo naman yung ako din
14:13.4
ang purpose ko din dito
14:17.4
kung sinasabi sa inyo
14:20.4
yung mga kabatas natin
14:21.4
sa pagkakataon ito,
14:22.4
What I like also is to contribute
14:29.9
To the laws of the land
14:32.0
And if I can do it
14:37.0
So, antayin natin mga kabatas natin
14:43.2
Kahihinatnan ng mga kaso
14:46.7
Na final ni Rafi Tulfo sa akin
14:48.5
Okay, yan, maraming salamat
14:50.4
Merry Christmas mga kabatas natin
14:51.8
At syempre tulad na lang yung sinasabi
14:53.4
Matulog po tayo ng mahimbing
14:54.6
Dahil alam natin na yung natutulog ng mahimbing
14:56.5
Siya yung laging panalo
14:58.0
Paalam po, pagsamantala
